Narrative:

Inbound to bwi, ATIS advertising landing runway 10 and runway 15R. Runway 10 was closed at both ends due to construction. The closed portions were poorly marked. No vertical guidance (PAPI, VASI, electronic GS) was provided. Approach assigned runway 10. We asked for runway 15R believing it to be a better operation. Controller originally agreed, then came back and gave us an indefinite hold of at least 30 mins if we wanted to use runway 15R. I again indicated the need for runway 15R and was parked in holding for a short period. I believe that this airport/ATC management decision is ill-advised. I understand the need for construction, however, to expect to continue to use a runway as a primary arrival runway with both ends closed, in hazy VFR conditions, with poor marking and no vertical guidance for multiple arrival of air carrier jets including heavy/widebody transport is asking for trouble. When there is poor or no marking of the closed sections pilots land long to avoid landing short. This sets them up to overrun the remaining runway into construction equipment/unprepared surfaces. Construction should be sequenced to only have one end of a primary runway closed at a time. Those closed portions of runway should be clearly marked with paint or panels held down by heavy flat bars. Portable PAPI or VASI should be provided. Heavy/widebody transport aircraft should not be forced to land on partial closed runways because a controller doesn't wish to be inconvenienced. The present situation at bwi is reducing the safety margin for air carrier operations. This degradation is unnecessary and unacceptable.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CAPT OF AN ACR WDB AIR HOLDS FOR A MORE ADEQUATE RWY SINCE THE ONE GIVEN BY ATC WAS SHORTENED AT BOTH ENDS DUE TO CONSTRUCTION.

Narrative: INBOUND TO BWI, ATIS ADVERTISING LNDG RWY 10 AND RWY 15R. RWY 10 WAS CLOSED AT BOTH ENDS DUE TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CLOSED PORTIONS WERE POORLY MARKED. NO VERT GUIDANCE (PAPI, VASI, ELECTRONIC GS) WAS PROVIDED. APCH ASSIGNED RWY 10. WE ASKED FOR RWY 15R BELIEVING IT TO BE A BETTER OP. CTLR ORIGINALLY AGREED, THEN CAME BACK AND GAVE US AN INDEFINITE HOLD OF AT LEAST 30 MINS IF WE WANTED TO USE RWY 15R. I AGAIN INDICATED THE NEED FOR RWY 15R AND WAS PARKED IN HOLDING FOR A SHORT PERIOD. I BELIEVE THAT THIS ARPT/ATC MGMNT DECISION IS ILL-ADVISED. I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR CONSTRUCTION, HOWEVER, TO EXPECT TO CONTINUE TO USE A RWY AS A PRIMARY ARR RWY WITH BOTH ENDS CLOSED, IN HAZY VFR CONDITIONS, WITH POOR MARKING AND NO VERT GUIDANCE FOR MULTIPLE ARR OF ACR JETS INCLUDING HVY/WDB IS ASKING FOR TROUBLE. WHEN THERE IS POOR OR NO MARKING OF THE CLOSED SECTIONS PLTS LAND LONG TO AVOID LNDG SHORT. THIS SETS THEM UP TO OVERRUN THE REMAINING RWY INTO CONSTRUCTION EQUIP/UNPREPARED SURFACES. CONSTRUCTION SHOULD BE SEQUENCED TO ONLY HAVE ONE END OF A PRIMARY RWY CLOSED AT A TIME. THOSE CLOSED PORTIONS OF RWY SHOULD BE CLRLY MARKED WITH PAINT OR PANELS HELD DOWN BY HVY FLAT BARS. PORTABLE PAPI OR VASI SHOULD BE PROVIDED. HVY/WDB ACFT SHOULD NOT BE FORCED TO LAND ON PARTIAL CLOSED RWYS BECAUSE A CTLR DOESN'T WISH TO BE INCONVENIENCED. THE PRESENT SIT AT BWI IS REDUCING THE SAFETY MARGIN FOR ACR OPS. THIS DEGRADATION IS UNNECESSARY AND UNACCEPTABLE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.